Improving Stall Design: Use of 3-D Kinematics to Measure Space Use by Dairy Cows when Lying Down
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Uncomfortable stalls reduce the time cows spend resting and are a risk factor for lameness. Although recommendations for stall dimensions are available, little research supports these recommendations. In this study, kinematic techniques were used to provide the first accurate measures of space used by Holstein dairy cows during lying-down movements in an open space and in a free stall. Cows (n=5, mean parity 3.2 +/- 1.0, body weight=607 +/- 21 kg) used up to 300 cm of longitudinal space when lying down, more than is typically provided by current industry recommendations for stall length. Cows used up to 109 cm of lateral space (180% of hip width), an estimate that is within current recommendations for stall width. During the lying-down movement, maximal lateral displacements at the hip occurred in two vertical zones: one between 95 and 135 cm, and the second less than 50 cm above the lying surface. Maximal longitudinal displacements of the nose were clustered 10 to 30 cm above the surface. These heights should be taken into account when designing and positioning stall partitions. Maximum instantaneous velocity of body markers approached 220 cm/s, indicating that cows can contact inappropriately placed stall partitions and the lying surface with considerable force. Kinematic techniques are promising ways of assessing spatial requirements of cattle to improve stall design. Further work is required to assess a wider range of cow sizes and stall configurations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".